Legal Opinion

Clifford v. Daugherty

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 25, 1980No. 79-1415PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Per curiam

In order to avoid the constitutional question determined by the trial court, the Court of Appeals construed the six-year limitation period of R. C. 4123.52 to be inapplicable to claimant. Though we affirm the Court of Appeals’ judgment, we reach the constitutional issue since the Court of Appeals erred in construing the statute.

*416I.

Prior to January 1, 1979, R. C. 4123.52, in relevant part, provided:

“The jurisdiction of the industrial commission over each case shall be continuing, and the commission may make such modification or change with respect to former findings or orders with respect…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  2. Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
  3. Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
  4. Sears v. WeimerOhio Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Provident Bank v. WoodOhio Supreme Court · 1973

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Wargetz v. Villa Sancta Anna Home for the AgedOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Felske v. DaughertyOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Lawrence v. Edwin Shaw HospitalOhio Court of Appeals · 1986
  4. Mentzer v. Westinghouse Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1983
  5. Felske v. DaughertyOhio Supreme Court · 1980

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API